The Waikato Times FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1938 LAND POLICY

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20503, 20 May 1938, Page 6

The Waikato Times FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1938 LAND POLICY

e ‘ lms (er of Lands, in the course of his speeches, approaches ■,? 6S an d settlement from an unusual angle. The other cihm * ea a countr V centre, he challenged his critics “to IhT ,rhe / e , farmei ' s ha <i had their lands taken from them.” If any °\ dlsP ° SSeS5lOn has been made has not been given much icin, ut probably there have been some settlers, either unable or umviuing to carry on, who have walked off their holdings. That rocess goes on continually, for it would be foolish to conclude that -\epone w o seeks and obtains a holding has the qualifications neces.ai Y or bringing it to a point where economic production is pos--7 ft, The Minister will not be criticised on account of those who, in e selective process which Nature imposes, have not the physical strength, initiative or knowledge demanded. But that is the neganesi e. The defence that should be available to the Minister of an s is to quote figures showing how settlement has been extended, c ivity m that respect would be welcomed by all sections, for it still constitutes the best, if not indeed the only, way open to the Dominion to deal with unemployment satisfactorily.

There is need for a considered statement on the part of the Government with respect to land settlement. When he spoke at Te Kuiti recent y Mr Langstone said that the Crown would not sell land but i wou not interfere with the titles now held. A committee reported to t e recent conference of the party outlining a scheme that would apparently mean supervision of a man’s farming operations until t e whole of his obligation to the State had been met. The exact extent of the supervision was not clearly defined, but it is hardly likely that any system along those lines would be acceptable to farmers here. It is said to exist at its highest point in Germany, where a man with dairy stock cannot retain sufficient milk for domestic requirements. Air Langstone, reviewing the position of the small farm developments scheme, claimed that the operations made the Department ‘ a real farming department,” but he should not assume that the community wants to see the State conducting farming operations in much the same way as the Railways Department conducts that service. The object of the small holdings system was to get men on the land, on terms that would enable them to establish homes and earn a reasonable living.

The scheme for the preparation of land for settlement, prior to the block being subdivided, was established long before Labour reached office, and it was never intended that this preparatory work should be changed in such a manner as to make the Lands Department a farming department. If there should be some confusion in the public mind as to what policy the Government means to pursue with regard to land and land settlement it is due to the rather contradictory statements that have been made from time to time. The party, at its conference, declared once more that socialisation of the means of production was a fundamental plank in the platform. Within a few hours the leader was asserting that the socialisation of farming lands had never been contemplated. Then Air Langstone took another course, and State farms seem to be a possibility, at least for a time. The issue may be raised during the coming session for some people see in the Alinister’s idea the commencement of a plan of socialised farming.